Abstract
The arts involve engaging the human imagination and sensory skills to communicate and create experiences, artifacts, and surroundings shared with others. Conventionally, education providers have compartmentalized the arts and sciences as separate and disparate disciplines. Yet, the future of work will continue to demand that organizations and their members remain agile, creative, and innovative in the face of ongoing uncertainty and change. As a result, leadership paradigms and models have been changing from top-down, command and control to relational, participative standards due to the need for collaborative expertise and organizational agility. This chapter will address the skills required for relational leaders and learning organizations, how higher education programs must model the way, and how integrating the arts within other disciplines could answer the call for deeper learning and collaborative engagement in the 21st century.
TopIntroduction
It has become widely acknowledged that tomorrow’s world is rapidly changing and will be different from today (Aoun, 2017; Schein & Schein, 2017; Weise et al., 2018). Technology has advanced to the point that humans and machines have been collaborating closely for decades and will continue to do so as artificial intelligence continues to advance (Aoun, 2017). As a result, skills from the fields of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) will continue to be valuable, but these proficiencies will be inadequate without the unique and creative human skills that can “endure in the face of automation” (Weise et al., 2018, p. 3). As Aoun (2017) aptly stated in his recent book Robot-Proof, “when the economy changes, so must education” (Introduction section). Moreover, the question remains as to how education providers can keep pace with future jobs yet to exist.
Lao Tzu once said, “In pursuit of knowledge, every day something is acquired; in pursuit of wisdom, every day something is dropped” (as cited in Weick, 2007, p. 5). Weick (2007) used this saying to highlight the dangers of hanging on to tools, concepts, assumptions, and other norms that weigh people down and prevent the agility needed in key moments. Personal growth requires letting go of old paradigms with the advent of new understanding. Likewise, the emergence of new paradigms of leading in an age of rapid change and uncertainty has created important considerations for leadership education and development. Leaders and education providers can no longer be considered the preeminent experts in everything, especially in an age when the only constant is the inevitability of change (Purg & Sutherland, 2017; Senge, 2006; Senge & von Ameln, 2019). In the complex and rapidly changing global business environment, managers and leaders must foster adaptive and creative solutions collectively within their teams (McKenna & Wenzel, 2016; Raelin, 2006; Rowland, 2016; Schein & Schein, 2017; Senge, 2006; Stenmark et al., 2011; Zaccaro & Banks, 2004). In response to these new realities, the traditional notions of leadership have already been shifting from top-down, heroic images of leadership to grounded and relational leadership models for thriving in the current dynamic, knowledge-driven, and culturally diverse environment (Owens & Hekman, 2012; Schein & Schein, 2018).
These emerging models are driven by an increasing concern for the ethical responsibilities of leading others (Ciulla, 2014; Lawton & Páez, 2015). Reports of inhumane treatment of individuals and corporate scandals across many different private and public sector administrations have led to increasing distrust in leaders, causing educators to revisit how to develop leaders who will make a positive difference in their organizations and communities (Crossan et al., 2013). These situations underscore many criticisms regarding leadership theories or developmental practices that deny the holistic nature of leadership by excluding the relational or shared aspects of leading (Lichtenstein et al., 2006; Weise et al., 2018). Thus, to examine leadership appropriately, one must begin with the understanding of the leader—and their followers—from a holistic perspective, as intellectual, physical, spiritual, and relational beings influenced by personal cultures (Schein & Schein, 2017).
Key Terms in this Chapter
Relational Identity: A view of the self as connected with others, noting how one’s behaviors and actions impact group goals; thus, transcending selfish motives to retain an emphasis on communal goals.
Arts-Based Experiential Learning: Experiential methods for learning are facilitated, student-centered approaches to training and education that are often group-based and include activities as experiences to engage rich dialogue and reflection on a given topic. Facilitators who integrate art-based learning create experiences from making, performing, observing, or reflecting on some form of visual, literary, or performing arts.
Social-Emotional Learning: A learning process centered on strengthening interpersonal skills such as self-control, self-awareness, and the ability to develop positive relationships, as well as developing the emotional temperance to cope with challenging situations.
Learning Identity: A view of the self as a learner that enables a person to seek to learn from their personal experiences and interactions with others.
Humble Leadership: A process of leadership in which the leader builds personalized relationships that enable group processes such as collaboration and innovation. The leader encourages effective group processes by remaining self-aware, remaining vulnerable to acknowledge one’s own limitations, appreciating others’ strengths, and empowering the contributions of team members.
Psychological Safety: A psychologically safe team environment is when employees feel comfortable sharing their thoughts and ideas without fear of being shamed or disregarded, even when their thoughts conflict with other points of view.
Learning Organization: An organizational culture in which leaders are supportive of ongoing learning and development of all employees. Garvin et al. (2006) AU45: The in-text citation "Garvin et al. (2006)" is not in the reference list. Please correct the citation, add the reference to the list, or delete the citation. identified three building blocks for a learning organization: an environment where employees feel safe to offer new and conflicting ideas, ongoing formal learning processes, and leadership that reinforces open-minded discussion. The literature emphasizes that the knowledge work of the 21st century requires learning organizations that can remain agile, creative, and innovative in an ever-changing global landscape.
Relational Leadership: A people-centered leadership model or framework that emphasizes the social processes of leading and organizing. As they appreciate the network of relationships among people in the organization, the relational leader ethically and inclusively empowers others on the team to contribute to a shared purpose. Transformational leadership is often considered a relational leadership model.